10-13-2024, 04:54 PM
(10-13-2024, 03:31 PM)quintessentone Wrote:Maybe you don't understand the technology? A cell phone has an unique identity. If it connects to a cell signal source a record exists. There is no room for bias in the analysis. Either the record exists or it doesn't.(10-12-2024, 05:29 PM)Lynyrd Skynyrd Wrote:(10-12-2024, 02:15 PM)quintessentone Wrote:(10-12-2024, 12:07 AM)Lynyrd Skynyrd Wrote:(10-11-2024, 11:12 PM)Upside Down Wrote: That does not make what people say on twitter credible.
On a similar subject though... I think that anybody who has done bad criminal activity on the internet.... even using VPN,.... even using encryption.... should be worried right now.
All of that information is saved, and law enforcement is breaking the encryption with quantum computers right now, and back tracking the VPN to your IP.
He's posted his professional credentials on LinkedIn. There are ways to check out people on Twitter, and test their credibility. He sets up geo-fences and does an analysis of the devices that are broadcasting. There are also published reports of people traveling on buses to a series of Kamala Harris rallies and being paid $100/day.
There is a big difference as to professional credibility vs. biased posting.
I'm not sure that understand your point. Are you suggesting that a digital data specialist, who sets up geo-fences professionally is a liar? Are you saying he didn't capture all those Harris rally cell signals, and didn't analyze them honestly?
Did you want to get into a discussion about inserting one's biases into one's analysis of anything and everything?